SAUNDERS: Don’t interrupt a Kamala Harris filibuster with questions she won’t answer

In the middle of Kamala Harris’ interview on Fox News Wednesday night, anchor Bret Baier brought up the vice president’s failure to articulate how she would govern differently from President Joe Biden during previous appearances on “The View” and “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert.” Both times, Harris was asked how she would contrast herself. Both times, she fudged her answer.

So when Baier asked Harris how her presidency would diverge from Biden’s, she should have seen it coming and been prepared with a brilliant answer.

This is what she said:

“Let me be very clear, my presidency will not be a continuation of Joe Biden’s presidency. And like every new president that comes into office, I will bring my life experiences, my professional experiences, and fresh and new ideas. I represent a new generation of leadership. I, for example, am someone who has not spent the majority of my career in Washington, D.C. I invite ideas whether it be from Republicans who support me who were just on stage with me minutes ago and the business sector and others who can contribute to the decisions that I make about, for example, my plan for increasing the supply of housing in America and bringing down the cost of housing.”

When Baier interrupted her less-than-enlightening remarks, Harris countered that he needed to “let me finish” — which is her way of reminding women voters of the moment in 2020 when she schooled then-Vice President Mike Pence for interrupting her during their debate. “If you don’t mind letting me finish,” Harris noted, “we can have conversation, OK?”

It’s four years later, and “let me finish” is her best rhetorical move.

And it’s followed by empty filibusters. Either Harris doesn’t want voters to know what she thinks on illegal immigration, or she doesn’t know what she thinks.

When Baier asked Harris a simple question — How many illegal immigrants would she estimate were released into the country over the last 3½ years? — Harris had no answer. Instead, she offered her usual stale rhetoric about “a broken immigration system that needs to be repaired.”

When Baier pressed Harris for a real answer, she went where she always goes: She hit Republicans for rejecting a bipartisan immigration bill this year.

Fun fact that you’ll never hear from Harris: Biden could have passed an immigration bill during his first two years in office, when Democrats also controlled Congress. It didn’t happen.

Could it be that Democrats didn’t want to solve the problem because they wanted to use it as an election issue — the accusation she frequently tosses at Trump?

Harris could have offered that she changed her mind on the border after millions entered the country illegally and blue cities had to deal with waves of unvetted migrants in need of housing and other services, but then she would risk alienating progressives who favor an open border.

Harris offered that she does not support decriminalizing border crossings. But that doesn’t mean a Harris administration would treat enforcement as a priority.

Asked if she would support government funding for gender transitioning among transsexual inmates and detainees, Harris responded, “I will follow the law.”

So again, voters are left with a guessing game. Does Harris still believe in policies she embraced as a typical California Democrat, or has she seen the light?

I was pleased that Baier asked the question that other journalists have failed to pose: When did Harris notice that Biden’s mental faculties diminished? And I was not surprised at her answer: Biden “has the judgment and experience” to serve in office, and besides, Biden “is not on the ballot.”

True, Kamala Harris is on the ballot. And she doesn’t want voters to know where she stands.

Contact Review-Journal Washington columnist Debra J. Saunders at dsaunders@reviewjournal.com. Follow @debrajsaunders on X.